Decent lens...

NickCantle · #1 (**permalink**) 24-11-2007, 12:48 AM

Hiya chaps.

I have to admit, I'm very much a close up photographer with my trusty Sigma 105mm Macro and the fungi...BUT I've recently developed a want for some bird and mammal photography and a lens to match. I'm not sure what's best to start with for birds...and then finding that at a reasonable price too. It's all above me. Which is why I thought I'd lob a post here and see what's recommended. So to sum up...I would like to know.

Good beginner bird and mammal photography lenses. Nothing 600mm lol...but an adequate size for doing the job on an acceptable level.

Price range. Maybe say up to £500 - £600

I have a Canon 400D

No preferences as to which type of lens mechanism as I'm still in the dark about that

All suggestions and comments welcomed and appreciated!

Kind regards...

Nick

rlchew · #2 (**permalink**) 24-11-2007, 08:18 AM

Hi Nick

I started out with a Sigma 80-400mm F4-5.6 lens for my Nikon D70 which I was very happy with for bird/mammal photography. I have since moved on to a Nikon D80/Sigma 500mm F4.5 combination although I do still use the 80-400mm.

Sigma Imaging (UK) Ltd

2 points though ....

Firstly, I am only familiar with this lens (and my 500mm prime) and there will be others which I am sure other WABers will comment on.

Secondly, this lens is around £800, more than your quoted price range, but Warehouse Express do offer interest free finance options which always helps to spread the pain.

Best of luck with what ever you choose.

Richard

ron1863 · #3 (**permalink**) 24-11-2007, 10:01 AM

Have a look at the Sigma 135-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG APO at £410.99 or the 170-500mm F5.6-6.3 DG APO at £508.99

Sigma SLR Lenses (Prime Lenses, Zoom Lenses, Lens Cloth, Convertors)- warehouseexpress.com

glsammy · #4 (**permalink**) 24-11-2007, 10:18 AM

Don't forget the Bigma!(Sigma 50-500mm)

You can get this for around the price point your setting yourself.
I wouldn't be without it. I've often toyed with the idea of getting a prime focus lens, and I know a few around here that have done that, but I'd miss the versatility of the zoom lens. In my humble opinion the Bigma is the best zoom lens under a grand you can get.
I was surprised when I saw how many of my shots are taken at less than the 500mm maximum. Have a look through my gallery for almost a couple of thousand examples!

NickCantle · #5 (**permalink**) 24-11-2007, 01:17 PM

Thank you for your responses chaps!!! I'll do a little research!

Nick

NickCantle · #6 (**permalink**) 24-11-2007, 03:10 PM

So what are the main differences between the Sigma 50-500mm and the Sigma 170-500mm F5.6-6.3 DG APO?

Hobjob · #7 (**permalink**) 25-11-2007, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickCantle

So what are the main differences between the Sigma 50-500mm and the Sigma 170-500mm F5.6-6.3 DG APO?

100 - 150 smackers, a bit of weight I imagine, but a vastly more usable zoom range.

Personally I love my image stabilizer 100-400 that the sigma's don't have.

Don't forget to budget for a good UV filter though.

NickCantle · #8 (**permalink**) 25-11-2007, 01:20 PM

Cheers Hobjob

Been churning it over in my mind all of yesterday and even as I woke up today I found myself dreaming of the Bigma. I searched around and found some 'reasonable?' prices

...

Looks like i'll have to wait until Christmas! But that's something to look forward to. As for the differences, it sounds like the Sigma is worth it...I've a 105mm Macro and that's done me proud. All of my recent images in the gallery are taken with it and I'm most pleased at some.

I always spare a little cash for a UV Filter.

Thanks!!!

Nick

Fourwings · #9 (**permalink**) 25-11-2007, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickCantle

So what are the main differences between the Sigma 50-500mm and the Sigma 170-500mm F5.6-6.3 DG APO?

Hi Nick,

Its simple really, the 170 -500mm is slow and sounds a bit like an industrial grade coffee grinder whilst focusing!

The Bigma is super fast focusing and almost silent.

I've had a Bigma for just over five months now and wouldn't swap it for anything, its a brilliant lens, its built like a tank, and consistantly produces top quality images, for the money you just cant fault it!

Steve.

NickCantle · #10 (**permalink**) 25-11-2007, 03:51 PM

Thanks for that Steve. You backed up something I was hoping for

My mother wont be pleased though!!

Thank you for all of your help. I'll keep you updated on the situation

Is there anything I'll need for the Sigma? Adapter or convertor rings so it fits on my 400D? Might sounds like I'm asking ridiculous questions but this is unexplored territory for me!!!

Thanks!

Nick

Fourwings · #11 (**permalink**) 25-11-2007, 04:04 PM

Just buy one with the Canon fitting and you are up and running, no adapters needed

It is a large lens and does work best on a tripod or monopod, but the results you get with it are brilliant.
Its a great lens for insect work as well, especially Dragonflies when they are just that bit too far out of reach for my Sigma 150 macro.

You certainly wont regret buying a Bigma Nick, in fact after a few months you'll be wondering how you ever coped without one!!

Steve.

NickCantle · #12 (**permalink**) 25-11-2007, 04:07 PM

That's what I'm talking about Steve! I love it!

paulthomas · #13 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickCantle

Good beginner bird and mammal photography lenses. Nothing 600mm lol...but an adequate size for doing the job on an acceptable level.

Birds have been covered by others recommendations. You need to be far more specific about what species of mammals you want to photograph though. If it's just Grey Squirrels or park deer in good light then an f5.6 lens will cope well. But for most mammals you really a lens which f4 or faster. You're not going to get everything you want on your tight budget. I'd suggest you get the Sigma 100-300/f4 which is about the same price as the Bigma but several leagues higher optically and then save for 1.4 times teleconverter to give you a bit more reach for birding.

NickCantle · #14 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 11:15 AM

As I said, I have no clue

Thanks for the info

Tormentil · #15 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourwings

The Bigma is super fast focusing and almost silent.

.......... its a brilliant lens, its built like a tank, and consistantly produces top quality images, for the money you just cant fault it!

Steve.

I'd go with that. An excellent lens, but you'll need a 'decent' tripod for it.

NickCantle · #16 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 12:20 PM

Ok Ben. Anything you would suggest?

It's going to be an expensive affair

Worth it though?

Tormentil · #17 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 12:28 PM

The Bigma is a heavy lens, so you'll need some thing that will hold it steady. I use a Slik Master Classic D3, which I find just the job. The D3 head is excellent and smooth to use.

I've no experience with other tripods, but there's some WABers swear by Manfrotto.

NickCantle · #18 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 01:14 PM

Oh no, Manfrotto...I was dreading that was going to come up

Expenses

Cheers though, I'll have a look at the one you use

Ollie · #19 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 02:34 PM

I use my bigma on a Manfrotto Classic 055 CL tripod with a Manfrotto 488RC4 ball head. Does the job admirably
Roger

glsammy · #20 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 03:04 PM

I use a monopod. I simply can't manage a tripod. The added advantage is it's also much cheaper than a tripod,

plus allows you to react faster. As your young and fit, you'd no doubt be able to manage a tripod easily, but if cash is extra tight after buying the lens, a monopod is a viable alternative.
You'd still need a good quality head on it though. I started out with a Jessops pod, but I soon broke the head! I've now got a manfrotto pod and head, which works just fine.

John D · #21 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulthomas

Birds have been covered by others recommendations. You need to be far more specific about what species of mammals you want to photograph though. If it's just Grey Squirrels or park deer in good light then an f5.6 lens will cope well. But for most mammals you really a lens which f4 or faster. You're not going to get everything you want on your tight budget. I'd suggest you get the Sigma 100-300/f4 which is about the same price as the Bigma but several leagues higher optically and then save for 1.4 times teleconverter to give you a bit more reach for birding.

I have the Sigma 100-300mm f4 lens and Sigma 1.4 TC and find it to be a very satisfactory combination. It is quite a bit lighter tham 'the bigma' and it has internal focusing (retains a consistent length throughout) making it very compact. Since it becomes f5.6 max with the TC fitted there are no AF problems.
It gets a very good 'write up' in several reviews and forums.
However I too look at other alternatives from time to time, don't think you can ever have the ideal, not even at a price
John D.

Maccattack · #22 (**permalink**) 26-11-2007, 07:28 PM

Sounds like the "bigma" as discussed. Do you use a tripod for your macro work , or is that all done with trowels beanbags and mirrors? (am not very certain of kit for fungi ). I suspect a sturdy tripod would be next on your list , maybe you could find one secondhand (have seen some quite good ones sold at our local camera club)

MMac